Thread

1. dabinat · 1790566087 · focus · HN ↗

   My experience with lawyers is that if you need a legal document, they often have templates ready to go and will take 10 seconds to find & replace your company name into the document. I know this because they often don’t proofread it afterwards. They then charge you $1000 for that 10 seconds of work. Given that I have felt ripped off by many lawyers, I’m totally fine with that industry getting disrupted.

   1. alphasm · 1790568512 · focus · HN ↗

      I recently had a similar experience where it became very clear that the lawyers were using AI to draft the agreements. Though it was very accurate and pedantic on some matters, it got other things completely wrong because it was not provided with full context, and full context is very difficult to provide.

      The lawyers did not properly review the agreements, causing post-signature discovery of major issues and having to redo and execute all the agreements a second time, leading to inflated lawyer bills.

      If the lawyer is going to prompt the same AI that I can prompt myself and is not going to review the agreements thoroughly, then it is clear where this is leading.

      1. tsss · 1790590539 · focus · HN ↗

         > then it is clear where this is leading

         Lawyers lobbying to outlaw AI-generated legal documents?

         1. sillyfluke · 1790595815 · focus · HN ↗

            They surely would if they could, but since they will inevitably use it themselves they would need to collude and make a deal with the AI companies to find some way to keep the public out and law firms in (one example being targeted knee-capping of the free and low price tiers with respect to legal matters).

            The ridiculous overcharging thing was something I thought the entire public was well versed in, so the idea that someone could earnestly think that they would get a discount seems absurd to me. As I recall, even the Oscars gift bags given to nominees in one of the years contained a prenup template supposedly crafted by best-in-business (divorce?) lawyers where you just needed to fill in the blanks. If you weren't getting a discount before AI, you are not getting a discount with AI I would presume.

            It is understandable to see the moat as the illiteracy of the public regarding the legal system because the concerted effort to keep that illiteracy in place is a disgrace. But when the stakes are high, the moat still is finding a lawyer who knows their shit and one you can hold accountable. Which is why I find the idea of lawyers being dependent on AI much more terrifying.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.